Reasons for Globalization Essay Sample
- Pages: 7
- Word count: 1,839
- Rewriting Possibility: 99% (excellent)
- Category: contract
Get Full Essay
Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues.Get Access
Introduction of TOPIC
The purpose of the paper is to explore negotiation process among international organizations as well as government. Writer will explore negotiations between Japan and U.S., Nigeria and U.S., and China and U.S. Writer will illuminate negotiation process in three different countries as described above. Writer will discuss factors that influence their decision and negotiation process. Conflicts among nations have necessitated the needs for countries and world organizations to step in to defend innocent citizens all over the world.
A conflict in one country may have a ripple effect on the rest of the world especially when oil producing countries have unrest. Crises is a driving force to force oil prices high which has an economic impart on the rest of the world. International negotiators always thrive to achieve a win-win. According to (Ming, Wang and Wang, 2009) merging and cooperation in different cultures with balancing can resolve such conflicts.
In a global setting, divergent languages and cultures have caused conflicts during negotiation process. Many countries have language barriers that made negotiation processes challenging. It is imminent that people who want to negotiate will be willing to give up some ground or demand to realize the peace process. Much negotiation process hit rocks because of lack of trust, cultural perception, unethical dealings, communicating gaps, language barriers and so on. A lack of credibility or absence of trust between the partners could prematurely terminate the negotiation (Manrai & Manrai, 2010). Key words: Negotiation, cross-cultural; negotiation, international negotiation, win-win, market share, U.S.-Chinese negotiation, Nigeria- U.S. negotiation, Japan-US negotiation.
Negotiation Process in Africa. U.S. and Japan
Differences in values and beliefs can beliefs can cause individuals to have different interpretations of same objective facts (Curhan, Kwak, & Tinsley, 1999). People’s cognitive processing is influenced by a variety of emotional states (Markus and Zajonc, 1985). (Argosy University, 2013) discussed domestic and international business deals involve culture, beliefs, and etiquette influence business, meetings, and negotiations. Negotiators from low -context cultures use direct, explicit and factual communications to persuade the partners whereas negotiators from high context cultures use indirect, implicit, and emotional communication to persuade the partners (Hall, 1976, 1979). Conflict of cultures illuminated divergent meaning to many people. Japan and U.S. negotiation process
Japan and United States are major trading partners (Adair, Brett, & Okumura, 2001); although both countries have different cultures (Graham, 1993; Graham & Sano, 1989). There is substantial descriptive information about differences between U.S. and Japanese negotiation style (e.g., March, 1990; Yoshimura, 1997). According to Graham, Japanese negotiators ask more questions but reveal less information than U.S. Negotiators (Graham & Sano, 1989). In Japan signing a contract means to start a negotiation, whereas in United States of America, signing a contract means the end of negotiation (Manrai & Manrai, 2010). When a Japanese company feels it is in a relatively weak position, it often fears that the other company may refuse to do business with them for the following reasons: (a) a smaller market share. (b) Higher competition. (c) Inferior technology, and (4) company needs (Kumayama, 1991). Nigeria and U.S. negotiation process
In Nigeria, initiating a contract starts with signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and end the negotiation with a signing a contract. U.S. defines their policies and goes by the book. United States is a democratic nation and play by the rules. U.S. uses diplomacy, lateral, bilateral techniques when negotiating between nations. When U.S. exhaust all negotiation especially when a nation poses a danger to the world trade boycott and use of force becomes imminent. Role of Trade unions, Labor organizations, and lobbyists help in negotiation process. United States uses their negotiation experts to deal with foreign negotiations. The United States has been at the center of every negotiating process since after the cold war. U.S. has economic interest in Nigeria because of their strategic roles Nigeria play in African continent as a leader in Economic Community in West African States and as a major oil supplier to United States.
United States understand that thirty years of Nigeria’s instability of government due
to military dictatorship hurts Nigeria politically and economically. In late 1980s and early 1990s,
Foreign investors see scams as a deterrent to investing in Nigeria. Nigeria has been marked as one of the countries unsafe for foreign investment. Through Nigeria/United States partnership, Nigeria has enforced policies to combat such crimes. Abuse of human rights has drawn attention of American government. Nigeria and United States have bilateral relationships to expedite Nigerian nationals who commit crimes and fly back to Nigeria. Under such agreement, Nigeria will never be a safe heaven for Alkaidas and criminals. United States’ interest in Nigeria is based on significant private investment in the economy, which is mainly in the oil sector which amounted to $4billion (Ayam, 2008). United States understands that major oil companies nationalized in Nigeria for business. Nigerians guarantees safety of foreign nationals. The political risks for foreign invest in Nigeria is minimum. U.S. and China Negotiation Process
U.S. and China are trading partners. With the introduction of China’s trade policy in 1999, U.S. and China signed a World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement in 1999. With the agreement China joined WTO in 2001. Despite the fact that China is a socialist country which operated in masculinity structure while U.S. is a democratic and capitalistic country with femininity structure, China and U.S. found a common ground to improve their business relationship. With U.S. and China WTO agreement in 1999, China joined WTO in 2001. Despite the fact China is a socialist country which operated in masculinity structure while U.S. is a democratic and capitalistic country with femininity structure, still China and U.S. found a common ground to improve their business relationship.
Despite the fact that China played important role boosting U.S. economy through manufacturing by outsourcing manufacturing jobs to China at a cheaper price and obtaining loans from China, still U.S. worry about China’s grave international violations. Such violations include: (a) Human right violation. (b) Copy right violations through CD piracy and designer products. (c) Selling arms to North Korea and other Nations as opposed with U.N regulations. (d) Production of cheap products to third world nations. U.S. charged China for producing more than 5 million CD’s out of piracy. U.S. further charged China that Chinese pirated CDs were being exported on a massive scale, threatening markets from Hong Kong to Canada. Other sources say that Africa is a dumping ground of all piracy materials.
There are 29 factories in Southern China that churned out an estimated 75 million illegal CDs. U.S. China copied music, designer shoes, and designer wears and sold to countries who cannot afford them. Many manufactures and music industries have lost revenues as a result of Chinese piracy. China has made frantic efforts to cooperate with U.S. policies by combating piracy crimes in China. To that effect, China closed 70 factories and exports of pirated products had been reduced significantly. Due interest of buyers of cheap products all over the world, it is difficult for China to combat the crime hundred percent. China has addressed issues of human right violation by reducing exploring children in manufacturing industries as well as making their workers work long hours.
Negotiation Process and Cultural Influence
Culture affects all aspects of negotiation behaviors both directly and indirectly and through negotiator’s attitudes and behavioral predispositions (called negotiator’s inclinations in our framework (Manrai & Manrai, 2010). Conflicts resonate as a result of cultural indifferences which could be resolved through give and take. Just like law of opportunity cost which calls for an individual to give up something in want of another. Nobody gets what he wants without giving up something.
Negotiation is a resolution process whereby people establish a win-win strategy to maintain balance. If intercultural negotiation’s joint gains are limited by sacrificing, they should on average be doing less negotiating than the intercultural negotiators, whose agreements are significantly more integrative (Adair, Brett, & Okumura, 2001). Because both parties have different cultural norms, different cultural norms, differences of opinion are likely to occur during negotiations. The successful negotiator will deal effectively with these differences to reach a mutually beneficial agreement (Argosy 2013).
Negotiator’s inclinations and negotiator’s qualifications can affect various issues related to agreements such as its form style of building agreement, etc (Manrai & Manrai, 2010). Business negotiations takes a different dimension because each country want to increase their bottom line by capitalizing on law of competitive advantage, thereby every country focus on areas they advantage and boost production and services at the least cost thereby beating prices of their competitors.
Kumayama, A. (1991). Japanese/American Cross-Cultural Business Negotiations. Intercultural Communication Studies 1(1).
Manrai A. K. & Manrai L. A. (2010). The Influence of Culture in International business Negotiations: A New Conceptual Framework and Managerial Implications. Journal of Transnational Management 15. 69-100.
Ayam J., 2008. The Development of Nigeria and United States Relations. Journal of Third World Studies
Ming W., Wang C., & Wang F., (2009). The Relationships among Cross-Cultural Management, Learning Organization, and Organizational performance in Multinationals. International Journal 37(1) 15-16
Adair W. L., Brett J. M. & Okumura T. (2001). Negotiation Behavior when Cultures Collide: The United States and Japan. Journal of applied Psychology 86 (3) 371-385.
Curhan J., J. Kwak R. S. & Tinsley C. H. (1999). Adopting a Dual lens Approach for Examining the Dilemma of Difference in international Business Negotiations. International Negotiation 4. 5-22.
Wang Q. K., (1999). The Rise of Neoclassical Economics and China’s WTO Agreement with the United States in 1999.
Macdonald, H. M, & Cheng, C.Y., (1983). Trade Regulations: U.S. and China Trade negotiation 64(4) 908-909.
Hulse R. & Sebenius J. K., (2003). Sequencing, Acoustic Separation, and 3-D negotiation of Complex Barriers: Charlene Barshefsky and IP Rights in China.